Week 2 saw West return to glory - 2 of top 3 scoring teams; a 3-1 record versus East's 2-2, and formerly hot Central 1-3.

Yes, the 4 teams from the West averaged 102 points per in week 2, almost exactly the league average. For you guys, that actually is pretty glorious.

In order to have a "return to glory", don't you have to have had an era of glory previously? I musta' slept through it...

This is the year of the impossible dream, If Detroit, Houston and Washington can be 2-0, Cleveland score over 50 in one game and OJ getting actually caught doing the illegal then anything is possible. O yea of little faith, rejoice, rejoice, I have seen the Lord and he is from the left division

Just 'cause He was wearing sandals doesn't mean He is from the West.

Doesn't the West have like 1 title in 8 years or something?

1999 - Mad Cow, runner up Skippy - Central, Central.
2000 - Bumbo, runner up Beach - West, West. The glory year.
2001 - NJ, runner up Penguin - East, East.
2002 - Skippy, RU Beach - Central, West.
2003 - NJ, RU CEO - East, Central.
2004 - NJ, RU G - East, Central.
2005 - Pengy, RU Skippy - East, Central.
2006 - NJ, RU Skippy - East, Central...and a pathetic game, btw.

So, total big game apperances by division,
7 for the Central
6 for the East
3 for the West

Total big game victories,
5 for the East - four in a row btw.
2 for the Central
1 for the West

BTW - NJ has won half of our SB's. Never has he lost one that he made it to.
Skippy has won only one of the four that he has been to.
Bumbo has the only west crown but Beach has made the game only to lose it twice.
Pengy is one and one.
Mad Cow still does not want to play for money but does own the first ever Rage title.
There has been 8 different owners to make the SB.
NJ and Pengy are the only two from the East to ever make it.
Bumbo and Beach are the only two from the West to ever make it.
MC, Skippy, CEO, and G have all made it from the Central.

Central gets to the big game but the East wins it.

Unfortunately I have the opposite luck in my local big $$$ league. Been to the championship game 7 of the last 9 years and lost 5 of them.

methinks next year we keep no players and have a blind draft using my uncle Guidos .05 slot machine with players pictures pasted on the reels....

I would take this moment to remind you and everyone else that I was not a supporter of the keeper system that we have. I do not like keepers in a league like ours.

You do know were allowed to draft and keep players not on the Steelers right?

I'd love to go to a redraft or a one player keeper or something different than we do now. I'm burnt out with the current format.

This is the first time ever that I can remember having more than one Steeler on my team. Never had Roth on any team. Willie I have on a bunch of teams only because I knew about him before the world. Holmes was just too good for me to pass at the time I took him, IMO. I am not at all a homer when it comes to fantasy football numbers. At least I don't think I am.

Just curious - what is it about "a league like ours" that makes you not like keepers in this instance?

I'm not trying to start up a big debate but what I don't like is that you can basicly keep any player penalty free forever. You get the right combo of players and you have a three player advantage over teams that have had poor luck and didn't draft the LT or whatever. I think that a keeper league should cost you to keep a player so that it gives poor teams a better chance to get better. We are sort of a hybrid dynasty as in theroy we keep the top 36 players every year. JMHO but really there is no perfect system that I know of.

If I remember correctly Hoffa had a different type of system that appealed to me. I think they could not keep any player that was drafted in the top three rounds and after that any player kept would equal losing the draft pick for the round that player was kept. So if you kept Kitna and you drafted him in the sixth round then you gave up your pick in the sixth round. Does this sound right? Anyway an interesting twist on redraft/keeper leagues.

I prefer a method where you give up a pick maybe two or thre rounds higher - insures that the player will go back into circulation within 2-3 seasons. If you strike gold in the 10th round say with a stud RB, you gotta' forfeit a 7th rounder to keep him, then a 4th rounder a year after that, then a first rounder if you choose to keep him yet again, and then you'd be forbidden from keeping him beyond that point.

that's exactly how my home league works. I love that format. I drafted L. Johnson three years ago in the 10th round. This will be his last year on my squad because of the league rules. We also can't keep any player drafted in the first three rounds.

I'd be in favor of something like that. I mean I don't want to disrupt our season and change any rules but in the off season if we were to open up these sorts of talks I would favor that over what we do. Maybe to ease us into it we could keep one this year with no questions ask and then use the three round move up thing for the rest of the team. Man that would change the way you pick those late picks and alter you dropping him for a kicker.

I actually like this format a lot, its different from my other leagues and since we have had such a good retention rate of owners for a long time, I'd be hesitant to vote in favor of anything that might screw up this fine league.

That said, if we did vote to make changes to the keeper system in the off season, I think the changes have to go into effect the following year (2009 season) not next year. You can't all of a sudden vote in the offseason that next year we are only going to keep 1 player when people are making trades, etc. right now based on this being a 3 player keeper league.

I think the fairest way to ease us into something like that next year would be to keep 3 as expected, and essentially call that rounds 1-3 and those players CANNOT be kept the following season (2009), then start the draft off with round 4, knowing that players taken in that round will cost you a 1st rounder to keep in 2009, if that makes any sense.

Also, for you guys that already play in those types of leagues, do you have more than a 14 man roster? The rosters in this league seem ultra tight to me as it is, I find myself dropping players that I really don't want to just to pick up bye week kickers, etc. It would seem like trying to manage the type of league you guys are describing would require us to expand the rosters since there would be certain guys who may not be contributing right now that you can't release because they are too valuable based on what draft pick you have to give up the following year.

My home league plays the exact format as mentioned earlier, our roster size is 18 players.

NJ makes a several valid points. If we do indeed vote a change, It probably shouldn't happen until 2009. But the most important thing" The Reall Beast of the East" (sorry Pengy) said was that this league has such great owner retention level from year-to-year with little owner changes since our inception. I'd hate to change if it means a shake-up in owners. We have such a good group of owners in this league, this by far is the most competitive league that I play and I really enjoy the competitive nature.

The beauty of all this discussion is that it keeps this topic alive at the top of the board - even though in reality us West Teams actually suck!

+1

I would vote against changing anything if it meant even one of our great group was not happy with the change. I mean what we have works. It is not something that I ever wanted, (personally), but I would not change it if it meant changing a single owner.

Group Hug.

Bump.

I'd like to take this opportunity to apply for a realignmernt to the West Divsion for myself, as I am currently suck in the toughest division. 4-3 and in last place in the Central.

Sure sucks that a team from the West will win the division and make the playoffs with a losing record.

Actually we recently agreed to join together and send an All-star team from all 4 teams to the playoffs. That way we'd have a chance to win one round maybe!

It's a very unusual situation for you g - you have second most points in the league, and you also have the second most favorable points against - I'd expect those two together to yield something better than 4-3. Still pretty early yet though.